WXV Discussion

[Hellopplz]

As I said to oz last night, would like to this "hypothesis" tested out before giving a final conclusion, but in theory... it sounds pretty cool to me.

Maybe could trial it in the pre-season period or after the regular season is over, have the teams who didn't make finals play some friendlies to test it out and see if it'll work.

I really like the idea of introducing fwds vs backs and using it to an advantage somehow, like in real life. Not sure if I'm fully on board with this way to go about it though.

I'm with Rico here, but only qualm with me is that it'll be more work for Purps to calculate everything. Makes it realistic but I'd say keep midfielders set, cause it's where the most points can be obtained and teams could just load midfielders to play 6 midfielders and get bonuses on them.

I like the idea though to add strategy, just need to see if it's applicable through a trial period and if it's not too much added work. Submitting teams through PM is interesting.

[Holz]

So let's take the forward v defenders as an example. For every extra forward you have, each forward gets an extra 5% scoring boost. So if you 5 forwards against 3 defenders, each one of your forwards will be increased by 10%. But, if you have less forwards against defenders, you are penalised 5% + another 5% for every player extra they have. So if you have 3 forwards against the 5 defenders, each one of your forwards score is reduced by 15% (5% penalty + 2 players less).

Teams would be submitted in private.

Interchange is free choice, they count as per normal, but do not count for on field numbers, unless they are required to come in as a late change.

Did that make sense?

I'm wondering if we should test it out EurAsia v AAP Alliance!

couldnt a legit strategy than say for the case of dublin i have 5 gun forwards. I trade one of my best backman to make it 6 forwards and play 2 6 1 6 each week and just crush people with my forward line, racking up huge bonus points on guys like buddy martin roughy gunston etc..?

[ossie85]

No Holz because you would be short in other lines and run the very real risk of losing more than you gain

I.e if you play 6 forwards you could only play say 3 mids and 3 defenders, if someone plays 6 mids against you you'd quickly lose the advantage

[Holz]

No Holz because you would be short in other lines and run the very real risk of losing more than you gain

I.e if you play 6 forwards you could only play say 3 mids and 3 defenders, if someone plays 6 mids against you you'd quickly lose the advantage

didnt see that you could play 6 mids. isnt that abit insane given you could than basically just play 8 midfielders. that totally devalues the forward and back positions.

[ossie85]

No Holz because you would be short in other lines and run the very real risk of losing more than you gain

I.e if you play 6 forwards you could only play say 3 mids and 3 defenders, if someone plays 6 mids against you you'd quickly lose the advantage

didnt see that you could play 6 mids. isnt that abit insane given you could than basically just play 8 midfielders. that totally devalues the forward and back positions.

well champion data has been doing that for a while. And if you played 6 mids you'd be short everywhere else, increasing the value of forwards and defenders

[GoLions]

No Holz because you would be short in other lines and run the very real risk of losing more than you gain

I.e if you play 6 forwards you could only play say 3 mids and 3 defenders, if someone plays 6 mids against you you'd quickly lose the advantage

didnt see that you could play 6 mids. isnt that abit insane given you could than basically just play 8 midfielders. that totally devalues the forward and back positions.

well champion data has been doing that for a while. And if you played 6 mids you'd be short everywhere else, increasing the value of forwards and defenders

Not really. Midfielders will generally score more, so the bonus you receive from them will be at it's highest. Whereas your forwards and defenders will usually score a fair bit less, so the penalty you receive from having less of them in comparison to your opponent will be pretty low (in comparison to the bonus from your mids).

[ossie85]

Which is why the penalty for having less players is more than the benefit of having more

Fyfe scores an extra 5% so lets say 8 points max. Mcdonald punished 10% so lets say 10 points

[GoLions]

Which is why the penalty for having less players is more than the benefit of having more

Fyfe scores an extra 5% so lets say 8 points max. Mcdonald punished 10% so lets say 10 points

Missed that.

Let's say we name a team with 5 defenders and 3 forwards, and our opponent goes 4 and 4. Would they also get a bonus and penalty? Or does that only apply for when you name a team that isn't of the regular format? I feel like this would be a bit too confusing :P

I don't mind the def/fwd being able to have extra, we can name an extra fwd or def in T10, and whoever you name in the last position of that line gets a 10% bonus or something if they're a 'loose man' so to speak.

[ossie85]

â–² they'd both get bonus penalties

[Memphistopheles]

You know what is lacking from this game which I think could be added?

Including key position players in the forward and defence lines. This is something we have in AFL but haven't so far replicated in fantasy games.

To do this how about introducing the FB, CHB, CHF and FF positions in to WXVs.

So for example naming your backline and forward lines like this:

Back Pocket (BP):
Full Back (FB):
Half-Back Flank (HBF):
Centre-Half Back: (CHB):

Centre-Half Forward: (CHF):
Half-Forward Flank (HFF):
Full Forward (FF):
Forward Pocket (FP):

We need to define what makes a key position player (I'd suggest perhaps 190cm or taller) and put the onus on coaches to list the players' heights when posting their teams to save the admins some work.

There'd be no penalty for teams who didn't have a 190cm+ player to name at FB, CHB, CHF and FF positions but if they did have an actual key position player there then the player would get a small scoring bonus (say an extra 5%).

It encourages a bit more strategy/thought when naming teams because you have to think whether a smaller player but a better scorer in general would be worth playing over a key position player in the FB, CHB, CHF or FF posts. For example Cape Town would now have to consider whether Nick Haynes or Will Schofield might be better served in our defence in a key post than say Jasper Pittard or Shane Savage.

It would also give key position players more currency in the off-season and encourage coaches to go after them instead of the mid/fwd or rebounding defender types which are always so popular. Also coaches would be more inclined to hang on to the best key position players who are, in my opinion, the most valuable players in the actual AFL.

Thoughts?

PS - I like the idea of using the All-Stars game to test out ideas like the AFL does with the NAB Cup.

[Nige]

Personally I think we have enough things that we do that make Worlds unique and exciting enough.

I feel all these latest suggestions are just going to make a good comp unnecessarily convoluted and add even more work for the admin (even though he's a glutton for punishment :P).

[Holz]

Personally I think we have enough things that we do that make Worlds unique and exciting enough.

I feel all these latest suggestions are just going to make a good comp unnecessarily convoluted and add even more work for the admin (even though he's a glutton for punishment :P).

this is huge, Nige and I agree on something.

finally something well said :P

[Purple 77]

Always love adding strategy to the game, so love hearing the ideas memph!

I like to think next year will have at least one change; whether it be tiny, or completely re-structure the game.

After my last exam tomorrow, that means I have NOTHING BUT WORLDS to focus on for like the next 3 weeks  :P so I might try and test some of these things out. I'll also try and put forward my take at expansion.

[ossie85]

What I'd like to see in world's is the ability for 1 team to impact the score of the other - something that all fantasy games lack really

I'd love a tagging player for instance

At the moment there's a bit too much of 'well I played that team on a good day'

Although he doesn't complain at all about it :p Moscow played Cairo on it's one good game of the year which will likely impact his finish.

I'm fine with that, but it would be good if you had your destiny in your own hands a bit

[Holz]

What I'd like to see in world's is the ability for 1 team to impact the score of the other - something that all fantasy games lack really

I'd love a tagging player for instance

At the moment there's a bit too much of 'well I played that team on a good day'

Although he doesn't complain at all about it :p Moscow played Cairo on it's one good game of the year which will likely impact his finish.

I'm fine with that, but it would be good if you had your destiny in your own hands a bit

I reckon a simple tagging is the way to go if that's your goals this postional stuff is abit complex.

one i would like to see if tagging a captain. So for example im playing fyfe this week i put the hard tag on him this week and he gets 1.2 of his score or whatever and I give up my captaincy and only get 1.